Stakeholder voices through rich pictures

1 downloads 0 Views 381KB Size Report
May 22, 2017 - A community resident in the area of Lokh Nga, Banda Aceh ..... Briner, W., Hastings, C. and Geddes, M. (1996), Project Leadership, Gower, ...
International Journal of Managing Projects in Business Stakeholder voices through rich pictures Derek Walker, Paul Steinfort, Tayyab Maqsood,

Article information:

Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 00:01 22 May 2017 (PT)

To cite this document: Derek Walker, Paul Steinfort, Tayyab Maqsood, (2014) "Stakeholder voices through rich pictures", International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, Vol. 7 Issue: 3, pp.342-361, doi: 10.1108/ IJMPB-10-2013-0050 Permanent link to this document: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJMPB-10-2013-0050 Downloaded on: 22 May 2017, At: 00:01 (PT) References: this document contains references to 71 other documents. To copy this document: [email protected] The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 553 times since 2014*

Users who downloaded this article also downloaded: (2014),"Understanding project success through analysis of project management approach", International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, Vol. 7 Iss 4 pp. 638-660 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ IJMPB-09-2013-0048 (2014),"How project managers can encourage and develop positive emotions in project teams", International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, Vol. 7 Iss 3 pp. 449-472 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ IJMPB-01-2013-0003

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:393177 []

For Authors If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.

About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services. Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. *Related content and download information correct at time of download.

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/1753-8378.htm

IJMPB 7,3

Stakeholder voices through rich pictures Derek Walker, Paul Steinfort and Tayyab Maqsood School of Property, Construction and Project Management, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia

342 Abstract

Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 00:01 22 May 2017 (PT)

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to illustrate, through an example taken from a recent research project, how rich pictures could be used to more effectively evaluate the delivery of projects. It has as its focus a detailed account of the process of identifying, interviewing and co-developing rich pictures with research respondents. Design/methodology/approach – The paper reports on research that undertook a soft systems methodology (SSM) combined with an action learning approach. Findings – The authors provided, one of eight rich pictures developed as part of a PhD study that used rich pictures as part of wider SSM study into understanding project management best practice. Key findings pertaining to this paper are summarised as follows: rich pictures provide a sound and holistic means to capture context, meaning and impact of situations that are often very difficult to document; use of the more use of artistic and cultural flow of colour, diagrams and symbols in the rich pictures presented a significantly improved resolution of such intangible aspects on a physical artefact such as a picture simply because colour, flow, models and symbols can act as suitable proxy to understanding and resolution; and researcher needs to have an open mind and be rigorous in questioning and interacting with interviewees. Research limitations/implications – This was based on one study only and serves to illustrate the value of an approach rather than a template to be generally used. Practical implications – This provides practical “how to” guidance on developing rich pictures within a SSM research approach. Social implications – The paper illustrates how to portray participants in a particularly sensitive case resulting from a natural disaster. This approach may help people to better express their experiences and to give them a clearer voice in telling their story. Originality/value – The major new contribution that the paper stress this paper makes is one of not only demonstrating that rich picture development is a powerful sensemaking tool but the paper also illustrates how it can be implemented and the authors demonstrated how it allows stakeholders to have a strong and influential voice in project conception and delivery. In reflecting on the use of this tool the paper suggests that it can be effectively applied or adapted for use in a range of disaster recovery situations and even wider in the resolution of purposeful programme development for all range of challenging projects. Keywords Stakeholders, Aid projects, Rich pictures, Soft systems methodology Paper type Research paper

International Journal of Managing Projects in Business Vol. 7 No. 3, 2014 pp. 342-361 r Emerald Group Publishing Limited 1753-8378 DOI 10.1108/IJMPB-10-2013-0050

1. Introduction A series of natural disasters associated with the earthquakes and tsunamis that struck the Asia/Pacific region killing hundreds of thousands of people and leaving many more destitute and homeless has triggered a surge in research interest in predictive and disaster response research and to a lesser extent how to improve delivery of critical aid relief projects. Similarly, for man-made disasters such as war (e.g. the Second World War Marshall plan) or nuclear power plant malfunctions (e.g. Three Mile Island or Chernobyl) also require the need for deploying massive project management (PM) resources and efforts to deal with them (Chang et al., 2010). Effective and sustainable post-disaster recovery entails not just replacing facilities and whole environments but

Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 00:01 22 May 2017 (PT)

also a well-considered strategy to obviate problems that caused the disasters in the first place (Haigh and Amaratunga, 2010). There has, however, been limited research fieldwork into how to improve delivery of these kinds of projects from an effective and practical PM perspective that fully recognises the challenges and difficulties that inhibits PM best practice to be applied to these kinds of project. In the wider context of both natural and man-made disasters, there has been a greater focus on creating resilience in those who survive disasters for them to not only cope with the immediate hardships they face but to also develop sustainable solutions to longer term problems posed by the disaster (Folke, 2006). Projects in this PM sector are complex because they bring the human element of life recovery for survivors of these catastrophes and so the rebuild may be the least complex part of an overall programme of projects to allow them to gain some renewed dignity and value in their lives. Programmes of recovery projects such as that for Hurricane Katrina in the USA or the Boxing Day Tsunami of 2014 can take decades to deliver. This demands that stakeholders, whose lives have been adversely affected, should have a clear and understood voice in the disaster recovery process (Steinfort, 2010). Post-disaster recovery can be a traumatic experience for recipients and those involved in reconstruction and rehabilitation projects. We can never be totally confident that there has not been a failure to obtain critical knowledge that fundamentally affects the project brief, its plan and hence its outcome. Vital steps required for successfully planning and delivering a project (Barrett and Stanley, 1999) include: the initial situation analysis which leads to a needs analysis; shaping the requirements brief; and then onto working out how best to deliver the project. As Smulders et al. (2008) argue, much of the knowledge that stakeholders possess is tacit and therefore not easy to extract. This presents a paradox because project and programme managers who offer disaster relief project solutions often do not know a great deal about the problem context and do not adequately consult and collaborate with those stakeholders who are in a position to best contribute to explaining that project situation and assist in developing a brief. A process of co-evolution of a project brief between stakeholders and the project manager would offer the best way forward for the recovery efforts (Steinfort, 2010; Steinfort and Walker, 2011). The right of project stakeholders to have a voice in the shaping and development of project goals and objectives is being seen as an important PM operational requirement (Berman et al., 1999; Winch, 2004; Bourne, 2005, 2009; Olander and Landin, 2005; Sutterfield et al., 2006; Aaltonen, 2010; Vaagaasar, 2011) as well as being an ethical and socially responsible requirement (Carroll, 1979; Donaldson and Preston, 1995; Alsop, 2004; OECD, 2004; AccountAbility, 2005; Porter and Kramer, 2011). Indeed, neglecting stakeholders with an apparently weak voice can prove disastrous in realising projects. For example, this aspect was rigorously revealed in a housing development project study set in a sensitive cultural environment (Teo and Loosemore, 2010). Facilitating systems to “hear” and respond to the stakeholder’s voice can increase the quality of communication and understanding and reduce the potential traumatic experience of their being ignored or misunderstood. This is relevant to those engaged in managing post-disaster assessment and recovery as well as for those whose lives and livelihoods are being renewed. First we need to answer the question who is a stakeholder? Dinsmore (1999) uses a pun to describe stakeholders as those who hold the beef, that is, those who have an interest. Cleland (1995) reminds us that effectively managing these stakeholders is essential at all phases of the project from “initiation” to “closeout”. Briner et al. (1996)

Stakeholder voices

343

IJMPB 7,3

Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 00:01 22 May 2017 (PT)

344

identified four sets of stakeholders: client; project leader’s organisation; outside services; and invisible team members. Cleland (1995, p. 151) recognised the need to develop an organisational structure of stakeholders through understanding each stakeholder’s interests and individually and collectively negotiating to define the best way to manage stakeholder needs and wants. Managing stakeholders by listening to their voice has been established in PM as an essential part of preparing a project brief and for developing viable project delivery plans (Bourne, 2005; Bourne and Walker, 2006; Aaltonen, 2011) and as an essential ingredient in governance and legitimate political accountability (de Bakker and den Hond, 2008) in project development and delivery. This leaves us with an interesting question that this paper seeks to answer. If stakeholder engagement is so important, and if some of the most vulnerable stakeholders find difficulty in expressing their voice, how can we best make their concerns and suggestions manifest? How can we reliably evaluate project success based upon stakeholder assessment and evaluation? We show in this paper that the use of rich pictures, as part of a soft systems methodology (SSM) process in action research, can unearth meaningful and valuable data, information, knowledge and perhaps more importantly emotions that can contribute to the development of effective project situation assessment, aims and vision as well as to develop effective operational action plans. We focus in this paper on one element of recent research that was undertaken to evaluate project success based upon a recently completed study of crisis management and recovery projects that has been extensively reported upon elsewhere (Steinfort, 2010; Steinfort and Walker, 2011). This paper is structured as follows. In Section 2 we present some salient concepts that we use throughout the paper. We explain how rich pictures form a valuable part of the SSM process within a pragmatic or Participatory Action Research (PAR) Paradigm. We also discuss the importance of situational analysis in preparing for projects and illustrate its use as an action learning approach to enhance effective planning at the project briefing and operational delivery phases of a project. This sets the context for the paper and sharply focuses rich picture development within the seven-stage PAR. In Section 3 we illustrate in detail how one rich picture was developed to assess the degree of success/failure of a project so that we can explain how this tool can be used in practice. In Section 4 we then discuss implications of using rich pictures, upon reflection after producing these some four years ago, how it has shaped our way of re-thinking how project briefing and planning can benefit from this approach. Section 5 concludes the paper and suggests how this approach may be used more effectively for crisis management and recovery projects. 2. Salient concepts Two main salient concepts are discussed in this section, SSM and rich pictures. SSM was developed by Checkland (1999, 2000) as a response to improve problem and situation analysis where “hard systems” failed to capture the nuances of a situation context and in particular, human emotional factors that can easily be ignored because of their tacit knowledge nature. SSM may be usefully applied as a problem solving tool for “messy” situations where the source of the problem is obscure and hidden and difficult to discern. It can also be applied to “wicked problems” (Rittel and Webber, 1973; Hancock, 2010) where the situation simply does not have any optimum solution and where the situation must be changed but that any solution may bring on other issues and so the choice is between “the devil and the deep blue sea”.

Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 00:01 22 May 2017 (PT)

SSM is an approach to action research problem identification and solving that originally was composed of seven stages (Checkland, 1999) though this has been modified over the years (Checkland, 2000; Winter and Checkland, 2003; Checkland and Winter, 2006; Winter, 2009; Winter and Szczepanek, 2009). These stages can be described as follows: (1)

The research problem situation in its messy or wicked complex form is identified in Stage 1 and this presents challenges because often the problem is not what it seems, symptom and problem may be cruelly entwined.

(2)

Stage 2 helps to unravel potential cause-effect confusions as the problem is iteratively expressed as a rich picture. A rich picture is a simplistic pictorial representation of the problem as perceived by those embroiled within the “problematic situation”. The advantage of using pictures is that they can express emotion, human and soft issues. Text and data often de-sensitises the emotional impact and “voice” of those with concerns illustrated through the picture. Checkland originally purposely used freehand cartoon figures and representations to express the grounded (earthiness) emotion behind the figures.

(3)

The first two stages are conducted in “the real world” that is in context with the described situation. Stage 3 is conducted in the conceptual or ideal world that suspends practicality of action but rigorously makes sense of the rich picture in order to develop a root definition that encapsulates the essence of the situation and potential solutions to the situation/problem. SSM situates the problem and proposed solution as a purposeful activity set in a clear and usable context. A root definition is a high-level statement that concisely states the nature of the situation/problem in terms of the customer, actors which are part of the transformation, the nature of the transformation taking place, the world view of actors, the owner of the situation and the environment in which this all takes place. It is essentially a high-level situation conceptualisation, a plausible and defendable hypothesis of research into how it came into being and a vision of the transformation to practice to take place to “solve” the situation.

(4)

Stage 4 results in a conceptual high-level model proposed from the root definitions to outline how the situation/problem can be theoretically and ideally resolved. These are the “things” needed to be done, how they should be done and by whom within the prevailing problem situation and environment.

(5)

The next stage moves from theory to practice in the real world. Comparison of the ideal models to the observed and understood “real world” constraints and opportunities are made to allow some pragmatic judgements and prioritisation to be made so that a realistic outcome can be proposed.

(6)

Stage 6 takes the judgements and assessments of the “real” environment and the ideal models are prioritised for action with a proposed implementation plan.

The final stage is implementation of the agreed set of actions to improve the situation. SSM uses a highly pragmatic approach and follows a path that bridges theory with practice. Checkland (2000) later modified and simplified these seven steps within an action learning format after reviewing the development and evolution of SSM over a 30-year span. He concluded that SSM should place emphasis on three key context questions related to what he calls the “root definition” of models for solution based upon PQR: what to do as a purposeful activity (P), How to do it (Q), and why do it (R)?

Stakeholder voices

345

IJMPB 7,3

Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 00:01 22 May 2017 (PT)

346

The whole SSM process is an exercise in action learning and action research resulting in double loop learning as described by Argyris and Scho¨n (1996) where cause-and-effect loop analysis leads to solving problems more effective than simple single loop work-arounds or “fixes”. Single loop learning is defined as action learning and double loop learning action research occurs when it achieves a new understanding and consequent changes of rules within the overall paradigm to that previously followed. SSM can lead to triple loop learning. Rowley (2006, p. 1253) describes triple loop learning in the following way; “triple loop learning can be defined as learning to learn to learn, or more explicitly understanding and engaging with the processes that change the learning processes”. The essence of SSM (the critical reflection, situation analysis, probing and testing while observing and refining action by all, distinguishing between actions and consequences) enables understanding of the situation. This deeper situational understanding is necessary for undertaking the SSM approach and leads us beyond searching for patterns of cause-and-affect double loop learning. It requires questioning fundamental assumptions and often changing “the rules of the game” in some way. The process of developing the root definition and ideal solutions promotes triple loop learning because it facilitates learning how to learn from a messy situation. Action research has been seen as meta-research (McKay and Marshall, 1999; McNiff and Whitehead, 2000; Dick, 2009). Action and research are treated as being indissolubly linked. This spiral of iteration between action and critical reflection is well equipped for this dual purpose. Critical reflection in action research facilitates research and understanding that in turn leads to purposeful action. A participatory spiral of alternating action and reflection enables action research to inform action and relevant theory in the service of community and organisational development. Situation analysis lies at the core of SSM as action learning. The ways that this can be expressed and understood are varied. One problem with textual narratives is that they only capture explicit information: data, words and facts. Narrative tends to inadequately capture feelings and emotions but pictures portray images that often resonate within a wider audience and can in some ways convey knowledge about a situation that is hidden in that situation. Pictures and pictograms have been with us for many thousands of years. Rich pictures are a set of connected and linked stories about a situation. They are very similar to cartoons in appearance and indicate situations, responses, consequences and feeling through the use of symbols such as clouds, sunshine, bolts of lightning, daggers, flowers, frowning or smiling faces, etc. (Finegan, 1994; Checkland and Winter, 2006; Bell and Morse, 2010; Checkland, 2010). The way that these are constructed, and decisions about how they should be presented, is not fixed in any way to a standard protocol or template. The aim of the exercise is to use symbols and a style that resonates with the story narrator and rich picture developer so that the integrity of the story shines through. We have previously explained our rationale for using SSM, action learning and taking a participatory approach in developing rich pictures elsewhere (Steinfort, 2010; Steinfort and Walker, 2011; Walker and Steinfort, 2011, 2013). Having explained the development of SSM and its use of rich pictures we can now provide a practical illustrative example drawn from the study of disaster relief projects. Many texts on SSM explain and discuss rich pictures but they tend not specifically explain in depth how to develop them. Our main intended contribution through this paper is to provide a step-by-step account of how a rich picture was developed, illustrate the end results

Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 00:01 22 May 2017 (PT)

and explain its value as a research tool to use when undertaking situational analysis. This will also demonstrate how voices of several stakeholders can also be portrayed through a rich picture. 3. Developing a rich picture 3.1 The context of the development of the illustrated rich picture examples The aim of the research project that we report upon (Steinfort, 2010) was to research and action PM issues faced by disaster recovery project managers. Thus an extreme type of case was purposefully chosen, as proposed by Yin (2009), as being likely to expose some of the most urgent and relevant PM issues in delivering disaster relief aid projects. The unit of analysis was the PM problems and how they were dealt with. The research objective was to develop a contextual analysis model that may be useful to project managers engaged in this type of project. The focus of this paper is on one part of that study in which evaluation of success or failure and the nature of factors that were neglected, ignored or misunderstood that had an impact upon failure and examples where the true voice of stakeholders was valuable and valued in achieving project success. The study included a SSM study of disaster recovery project work stemming from the 2004 Boxing Day Tsunami that left hundreds of thousands of people dead in the South East Asia Region. One of the researchers had become involved in aid relief PM work and had developed an interest in how PM tools and techniques may or may not assist those delivering aid projects and what, if any, antecedents of PM success could be identified. Post-tsunami disaster recovery projects in the Aceh region were particularly complex and challenging and so this appeared to be an extreme case worthy of study of how these projects were managed. In all, eight people were interviewed who were engaged in PM activities on eight different projects among the vast array of projects being undertaken at that time. The choice of these projects was based on a rationale of having access to project managers engaged in aid recovery projects and that these projects were representative of highly complex and messy situations involving people recovering from a disaster that had devastated the normal infrastructure expected to be used when delivering government funded, commercial or industrial projects. To fully understand the situation faced by project managers on such projects it was necessary to canvas an eclectic range of views; from the PM perspective, the “client” or beneficiary perspective, from donor organisation representatives and from the perspective of government officials responsible for overseeing the recovery. Additionally, it was important to gain perspectives from the project “head/regional office” as well as on-the-ground and to have access to interview people at these levels of investigation. Those chosen to be interviewed are presented in Table I. This choice of interviewees provided a rich and broad source of perspectives with which to help describe the situations faced by the recovery and reconstruction effort and the many and diverse problems, issues, risks and opportunities that shrouded the programme of recovery projects. Project participants, including the direct stakeholders, experienced and coped with a highly complex and “messy situation” characterised by inherent paradoxes, ambiguities and uncertainties to resolve that involved a host of issues around communication, logistics, expectation management and also encompassing a cultural dimension that added to PM complexity. 3.2 Illustration example of the process of developing a rich picture Actors were purposefully chosen who were embedded within the situation under study, had intimate knowledge of various stages of the disaster recovery projects and so had

Stakeholder voices

347

IJMPB 7,3

Actor

Description

Experience

1

An UN Consultant with AusAid and Indonesian Government training involved in crucial Recovery and Reconstruction Programmes in Nias and Aceh The Indonesian Government high-level responsibility person for recovery and reconstruction in Aceh and Nias Islands The founder of an International Non Government Organisation (NGO) for Recovery and Health Programs on several Indonesian Islands An AusAid Funded Emergency Preparation Program Manager for the Nias and Mentawai Islands who one of the authors worked with on the Tsunami recovery programmes A community resident in the area of Lokh Nga, Banda Aceh who lived through the tsunami, lost family members, but then was very involved in the reconstruction and livelihood efforts in his village and has building and construction experience at the same time A young field coordinator in the recovery and reconstruction of an American based NGO involved in both reconstruction and livelihood development in the stricken islands An Australian Qualified Project Manager working on AusAid and other funded projects in Aceh and Jogjakarta reconstruction over the time in Programme Design, NGO Agent and Prime Contractor The COO of an International NGO working in both Australia and Indonesia in the time period after the tsunami and in related Community Health Care and Disaster Emergency Preparation and Recovery Programmes

40 years

2

348

3 4

Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 00:01 22 May 2017 (PT)

5

6 7

8 Table I. List of actors interviewed in the broader study

30 years 30 years 15 years Many years local and international

2 years 12 years

7 years

valid and useful perspectives that they needed to give voice to for the situational context to be well understood and that the way that these projects were delivered (degree of success or failure) could benefit from their knowledge contribution about the projects. Arrangements were made to interview them and to develop rich pictures that helped clarify what they perceived to be PM-related issues in a way that reflected their world view. The co-development (researcher and interviewee) of the rich picture required in-depth interviews and co-generation of knowledge embedded within the rich pictures. Specific effort was made to ask about soft as well as hard issues such as feelings, emotions and consequences of actions undertaken through these projects rather than simply seeking data and explicit information such as project time, cost, expected definitions and specification of quality. We made it clear that the intention was to understand, as far as is possible through their eyes and appreciating their experience of these very challenging situations, and identify critical success and failure factors of the work they had been heavily involved with. Participants were interviewed in their workplace environment, mostly in the environment in which the disaster had actually happened. They were asked to describe as openly and honestly as possible: all that happened both in the disaster and what followed; their sense of what they considered to be or not be key success factors; and the extent of how, and why stakeholder groups were able to be effective. They were asked to consider what lessons were learnt from their projects, using their theoretical frame of reference of project success or failure, given the project context and general sequence of events. Revealing their stories inevitably involved dilemmas in reliving the

Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 00:01 22 May 2017 (PT)

trauma through retelling their perceived reality of the situation. Unlike general PM situations which have commercial outcomes, disaster recovery projects are delivered by participants who are embedded in often dangerous and usually traumatic conditions. This is why capturing “soft” as well as “hard” issues is so important. One key advantage of this technique in developing rich pictures to tell a vivid story is that it leverages the “soft” or human side of situation analysis involving emotion and feelings and through reflection and dialogue, constant probing and explaining. This surfaces many underlying issues and perspectives that would otherwise never be expressed explicitly through a “hard” systems analysis. It provides an effective means to question assumptions and turn tacit knowledge into an explicit form even if that format is a picture and not a specific narrative. This aspect of data gathering requirement for research in disaster recovery projects has ramifications for the choice of research paradigm, ontology and epistemology. The work assumes a constructed reality and not observed independent “facts”. Interviewee bias is recognised as somewhat inevitable because intensely personal perspectives are revealed so the interviewer must respect that the interviewee’s story is being told from their perspective so any interpretational interventions, in helping draft and clarifying rich pictures, does not reflect the interviewer’s views. For example, the rich picture production phase must allow for continual and extensive periods of checking and re-checking by the interviewee leading to review and refinement until the story has been told as honestly and clearly as possible. Any account should thus reflect and represent the interviewee’s “voice”. Key factors impacting upon overall project success/failure were addressed through the interviewees’ discovery of their perception of these critical factors as working or not working for best outcomes, or at least being workable outcomes, considering the devastating experience they had endured. The point of the exercise is to see the situation as the perceived “reality” according to those interviewed. The process of developing rich pictures is a co-development and co-learning process. A dialogue takes place and both parties playfully decide upon and sketch out elements of the story in both words and images. The researcher’s role in this process was listening carefully, taking notes, and making sketches to offer the interviewee the researcher’s understanding of the situation to assist in both parties interpreting the story does so iteratively by sketching elements of the picture and presenting it back to the interviewee. The interviewee would then reflect upon and correct the picture content at each iteration by engaging in a process of dialogue and knowledge co-generation with the researcher actually drawing the rich picture and refining it after receiving feedback on how the picture reflected the perceived realities. Both parties to its creation sense a deeper understanding of the situation emerging as the picture unfolds until the interviewee feels sufficiently confident with the accuracy of portrayal of the picture to sign it off as final output. Often, hidden causes and influences would be surfaced through this process and in particular through the reflection that it triggers. These emergences of meaning, where sub-conscious or culturally assumed knowledge is made explicit through the co-generation of the rich picture, provide a unique mechanism for the stakeholder inner as well as outer voice to be heard. Whenever people are forced to explain concepts or plans to others they engage in two very important conversations. One conversation is with themselves as they prepare in their mind what to say, how best to frame that and how best to illustrate their thoughts in a way that others might best understand their meaning. This preparation is vital as it forms a reality check and self-reflective mechanism to filter poorly formed

Stakeholder voices

349

IJMPB 7,3

Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 00:01 22 May 2017 (PT)

350

elements of their thoughts (Luria, 1973; Emerson, 1983; Vygotskii, 1986). The other conversation is with the listener who then reflects on this new information in an act of self-reflection undertaken through the dialog. In this way the construction of meaning can be a highly creative exercise because as one party to a dialogue explains meaning and nuance they not only inform the other party but they inform themselves and often take leaps of imagination as a form of creativity (Leonard and Straus, 1997; Leonard and Sensiper, 1998; Amabile and Kramer, 2007). Interviews varied in intensity and involvement but we can confirm that many involved an initial period of face-to-face interaction of several hours spread over several days. Interviews undertaken in the field involved travel to the sites and this often involved using precarious forms of transport. The drafting and re-drafting of the pictures involved additional and extended interaction via e-mail and voice communication. This exhaustive process enabled the pictures to reach a saturation point where the actor (interviewee) felt that no more could be added that did not result in confusion rather than clarity. The process was not so much one of elaboration but one of refinement. All efforts to minimise interviewer bias was pursued through participant sign-off of the final rich picture versions. This ensured purity of the stakeholder’s voice. The success in gaining understanding, appropriate response and unconditioned agreement to the pictures prompted an innovation in the rich picture development that seemed to work effectively under these circumstances. This innovation involved the use of colours and symbols such as ellipses and other shapes rather than arrows to indicate flow, sequence and interaction. Our rich pictures vary markedly from traditional rich pictures in their more purposeful structure and their use of colours and layers rather than relying on arrows for process sequencing or relationships (Walker and Steinfort, 2013). The key to its development was the initial problem of realising that normal arrows used in SSM were not effective in signifying trajectories in some eastern cultures (and this work had to be multi-cultural) where arrows were viewed as being related to power application. A step-by-step process illustrated with arrows is not how people from some cultures perceive how life really works. Time also has a different meaning. Clock time is perceived differently from “seasonal” or natural rhythm-time (Trompenaars, 1993; Manning, 2003; Dorfman et al., 2004; Chhokar et al., 2008). Seeing time sequences as passing through phases and possibly moving back and forward over the same boundary in a broad sense, rather than follow linear steps, is closer to the way that people arrive at decisions or a sequence of activities or project processes. Solso (1994) argues, through adopting an artist’s perspective, that colours have a natural sequence (which is readily understood by people) with a natural order of colours from hot or warm colours such as red or orange through to cool or cold colours such as blue or purple. This natural order is also mathematical in relation to wavelengths and has been used by artists for centuries when painting landscapes where the use of blue or purple represents an object in the distance and red or yellow brings it to the foreground. So the more immediate phases or actions/stage processes were allocated the colour red in the rich pictures and the purposeful outcomes or end results given a blue or even purple colour to represent long-term sustainability. This approach resonated well with interviewees and we argue that this colour sequence is a significant breakthrough in rich picture work. Checkland (2010) maintains that SSM should make the most meaning out of rich pictures whilst ensuring that they are simple and understandable to the community that they are used with.

Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 00:01 22 May 2017 (PT)

The other breakthrough enabled through this approach was the realisation that colours do have international significance in meaning and effective communications. For example, consider traffic lights. Red then orange then green for go. In fact, the action researcher developed the process through the understood universal application of colours in emergencies, red for urgency, fire, danger, blood, ambulance, etc,, green for go, growth, “ok”, etc., and blue for arrival, achievement, etc. (Standards Australia, 1997). The colour code we developed from all of the above is illustrated in Figure 1. Having now explained the process from selecting actors to gaining insights through the dialogue that results in the picture being developed we now present one of the eight rich pictures developed for the research (Steinfort, 2010).

Stakeholder voices

351

3.3 Reviewing an actual rich picture We have chosen to review a rich picture undertaken with Actor 8 from Table I that is illustrated in Figure 2. This rich picture illustrates the final story of that particular disaster recovery project’s messy PM situation. Red: urgency, danger, fire, blood Orange: support, caution, warning Yellow: communication, intelligence Green: growth, safety, nature Blue: depth, sky, confidence, achieve Purple: independence,wisdom,dignity

Figure 1. Colour coding for the rich picture international developments

Figure 2. Rich Picture involving reconstruction and livelihood development

IJMPB 7,3

Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 00:01 22 May 2017 (PT)

352

Figure 3. Primary and secondary layers of rich picture example

Figure 2 also includes key notes that provide contextual and environmental reference to key steps illustrated by coloured ellipses. The situation is further enhanced with illustrations as a series of drawings and cartoon-like illustration that imbue the feeling of the “problem situation unstructured” (step 1 of the SSM process and brought forward to the rich picture reality base) more effectively that words alone can convey. Meaning is captured through these illustrations; the text as call-out captions and short messages as well as the ellipses and the choice of their colouring to represent sequence and task. The pictures in themselves cannot convey all of these contextual meanings. The notes and their sequence in a project therefore inform, and most importantly, fashion the sequencing of key PM factors. This approach to developing a rich picture proved essential to the resolution of a process and methodology that we subsequently followed and validated through the research and subsequently through further action research in a series of other serious disaster recovery projects. We have extracted key factors from the fully developed rich picture illustrated in Figure 2 that predominately illustrate the ellipse forms as a sequence of action in Figure 3 in order to help readers make sense of core elements of this picture. These actions are denoted by colour as explained in Figure 1 and the description following that figure. Figure 3 illustrates many important aspects of PM, reconstruction and resilience. While these aspects are closely linked they often are not perceived to be connected in traditional segregated PM rebuild projects where impact on sustainable outcomes may be considered to be out of scope. It also raises, the need for “Programme Monitoring and Evaluation to be developed with commitment and understanding overall”.

Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 00:01 22 May 2017 (PT)

Notes emphasise the need for “Empathy, Understanding of Sustainable Learning and Training” at the bottom right hand side of Figures 2 and 3. This is a critical message later reinforced as a major challenge in subsequent observations that followed this particular study with disaster recovery projects that one of the authors participated in as an advisor (on Pakistan post-flood, Christchurch post-earthquake, Australia post-bushfire, Australia post-flood and Japan post-tsunami recovery projects). Another example of an important challenging and messy issue illustrated in this rich picture worth drawing to the reader’s attention is the word “Leadership” followed by a question mark at the top of Figure 3. This rich picture also raises leadership aspects through culture and community dimensions and points to broad differences in chains of command and the need for accurate verifiable information. These are typically emotional intelligence (EI) factors (Goleman, 2006; Clarke and Howell, 2009). Interestingly, Turner et al. (2009) compared the leadership styles of functional and project managers and found that leadership is not recognised in the highest ranking success factors for PM whereas Turner and Lloyd-Walker (2008) found it important and having a positive impact on project success. However, we found in this study that the context and circumstances demanded high levels of EI because of the traumatised experience of many project participants and the cross-cultural nature of this kind of project work. This fits with more recent work undertaken on the concept of authentic leadership in project work. Toor and Ofori (2008) define authentic leadership being characterised as: “Authentic project leaders possess positive values, lead from the heart, set highest levels of ethics and morality, and go beyond their personal interests for well-being of their followers. They capitalize on the environment of trust and are able to motivate people and accomplish challenging tasks” (Toor and Ofori, 2008, p. 621). They also note that authentic leaders understand the demands of the project from the key stakeholders’ point of view, possess the skill of leadership and give their best to make the project a success for all stakeholders. This leadership aspect was highlighted with respect to the rectangle captioned “Stakeholder/Vision/Shared/Led” and its colour red. The red colour denotes urgency, in this case identifying and agreeing the vision between different cultures and chains of commands and how that may be led. This is engaged in the rich picture through the “organization” orange shaped ellipse as well as the caption centre-top stating “need simple connection between bottom up planning and top down commitments” is coloured red to yellow to indicate urgency and flexibility is placed next to a thought bubble (representing non-hierarchical influence) noting “that planning needs to be ‘s.m.a.r.t’ (i.e. specific, measurable, attainable, realistic and timely) and have agreed success criteria”. Ellipses indicate core learning through action arrived at by each interviewee through key step processes. These key step processes became fundamental in the understanding of the key success factors for programmes of projects in post-disaster reconstruction which was the primary purpose of this research to resolve. In this respect, recognising the key factors through the interviews from red through the colour spectrum to purple was very useful. It enabled a rich diversity of participants to readily engage and voice their perception of “reality” more effectively than relying on traditional rich picture drawing development. It is unlikely that we could have achieved the depth of understanding and richness of communication needed between researcher and interviewee to develop the rich pictures to carry out this research successfully had the key researcher not used these logical colours and human understanding of the flow processes. For example,

Stakeholder voices

353

IJMPB 7,3

Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 00:01 22 May 2017 (PT)

354

Bell and Morse (2010) recommend that is very important to use vibrant colour to enhance meaning in rich pictures and indeed this proved a very telling realisation through practice. The entire rich picture’s message illustrated in Figure 2 together with the seven other rich pictures the models for programme to project solution (step 4 of the SSM process) proved consistent with subsequent disaster programmes where the key researcher was engaged as an advisor and consultant. Each of the eight rich pictures, Figure 2 being only one of them, expressed the voice of a selected actor as stakeholder. In this study it was a representative range of people directly involved in being responsible for managing disaster recovery projects. The root definition for this project effectively set the scope. If the purpose of the study and its scope had been wider we would have interviewed a representative sample of other stakeholders in these projects. If it had been narrower, confined to one project, for example, we would have used rich pictures to get a consolidated view from a represented sample of the stakeholders from that one project. One of the other authors in another separate research project studied the diffusion of five innovations in a major construction firm where a representative sample of stakeholders for each innovation was interviewed to co-develop rich pictures to generate a better understanding of how knowledge about those innovations was transferred within the organisation. That example illustrates how rich pictures gives a voice to numerous stakeholders (Maqsood et al., 2007). Rich pictures were used to make sense of how data from the research (Steinfort, 2010) could be used to improve project performance in disaster recovery projects and the full SSM approach and how it was applied was explained elsewhere (Steinfort and Walker, 2011, 2013). The aim of this paper and this section in particular was to explain in greater depth than has been published previously, how the rich pictures illustrated in this paper were developed, how they gave voice to interviewees and how it could be used as a monitoring and evaluation tool. 4. Implications for using rich pictures We argued in the paper’s introduction that a rigorous project brief relies upon reliable situation analysis and that was particularly important in the context of disaster recovery projects. We also stressed the importance of rigorous situation analysis being undertaken to find out from stakeholders what they would regard as project success in fulfilling their needs and requirements. In Section 2 we explained how rich pictures are used as part of the SSM approach that informs a root definition to be developed that provides a trigger for purposeful action that is translated into projects and used to develop project plans. We used this approach in this paper as a monitoring and evaluation tool. It becomes evident that use of rich pictures in the way documented in this paper has several important implications. These can be summarised as having implications for: (1) the data source; (2) the researcher; (3) validity and credibility of the output; (4) research methodology in general; and (5) the project outcome. These five points are further discussed below.

Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 00:01 22 May 2017 (PT)

4.1 The data source It is vital to reduce communication asymmetry when undertaking research of this kind, in remote locations with people that are perhaps somewhat suspicious of the motives of the researcher or the project donor/initiator. The data source may be culturally inhibited from providing open and unfettered dialogue with the research because they may be troubled by issues of “face”; that is, appearing to be disrespectful or ignorant or that questions or answers may be considered by them to be inappropriate, personal or intrusive. Use of a survey instrument can yield poor quality data for understanding the situation because surveys are usually closed-question in nature, laden with assumptions and prone to misinterpretation (Miles and Huberman, 1994). The aim of most surveys is to provide data used with a positivist world view that assumes that reality is “out there” to be counted, observed and described. Interviews are useful for seeking opinions, revealing world-views of those interviewed and describing qualitative data to aid understanding of “why” and “how” type questions in a more pragmatic and empathetic way. Surveys can reveal emotions to certain extend but are restricted by granularity in language and description. We argue that diagrams, models and pictures can more easily be used as an effective knowledge co-generation device. They provide boundary objects used in the negotiation of meaning. As the interviewee tells their story, their perception of the messy situation as it impacts upon them and those they may hold dear to them, they can prompt the interviewee to sketch a cartoon, illustration or caption that can be improved upon in an iterative process until the illustration holistically reflects the situation as perceived by the data source, i.e. the interviewee. As Bell and Morse (2010) argue, co-developing rich pictures can trigger humour and engagement in a way that dialogue may miss. It can form an ice-breaker where otherwise the relationship between interviewer and interviewee could be otherwise stilted or inhibited. However, the main implication here is that both parties need to understand that this playful data delivery mode has its serious side and that it is not merely a form of entertainment. 4.2 The researcher Issues of integrity, ethical and authentic leadership, emotional and social intelligence are a part of the “why” type question and may even be able to be embedded in the process rather than rely on who may, or may not, have sufficient ethical leadership in the challenging contexts and programmes. A rich picture is a tool to gather qualitative data and seeks to unearth emotions, feelings and the interviewee’s opinions. The source is assumed to be immersed within the revealed situation and so it is important that the research selects an appropriate interviewee, ensures that all ground rules about what is expected, what is inappropriate and what is valuable is made clear. This sets the boundaries within which the interviewee and researcher can “play” and test various versions of “reality” as perceived by the interviewee. It may be necessary to enlist the aid of a carefully selected interpreter if language and meaning becomes a potential issue. Certainly the researcher needs to be culturally aware of any taboos, inappropriate interchange that may offend or be perceived as being disrespectful. Rich pictures should be humanly relatable and do not need to be works of art so only a modicum of skill in drawing and characterisation is necessary. The researcher, however, also needs to be rigorous in validating the picture by iteratively checking with the interviewees their validity to the point where saturation occurs. During this phase of iteratively validating the picture, the interviewee is prompted to reflect and consider the whole picture as it emerges. Frequently, this is the first time that

Stakeholder voices

355

IJMPB 7,3

Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 00:01 22 May 2017 (PT)

356

interviewees see the situation holistically in this light and they may well have a moment of epiphany and thus better understand nuances that they had not surfaced before. It is important that researchers allow time for any potential for this kind of realisation to form and be expressed without trying to force such a moment. It is also vital that they enter dialogue with those they interview with a spirit of collaboration and co-learning as well as humility in that those interviews are chosen for being subject matter experts about the experiences they are describing. While we acknowledge that once the process moves from rich picture to root definition and then purposeful action proposal that this may exclude stakeholders voicing concerns we argue that the co-learning and collaboration to that point minimises bias being inadvertently introduced. We also acknowledge that at the root definition in Checkland’s way stakeholders’ interests may have been compromised within a broader political context – but this core of this more flowing, coloured, diagrammatic, not text reliant root definition brings cultural insight and agreement to the resolution. 4.3 Validity and creditability of the output The importance of the rich picture being the interviewee’s perception of the situation cannot be understated. The researcher may ask questions about interaction of elements that emerge in the picture in order to also understand it as a coherent narrative in pictorial form and such questions may challenge the interviewee’s assumptions about the situation. The iterations should continue back and forth until saturation occurs and that the picture’s meaning is sufficiently clear for a root definition to be developed. The rich picture remains a story/narrative and artwork until it becomes instrumental to developing a purposeful action through the development of a root definition. Credibility of the output is achieved when it is accepted as representative of the situation, realistic and useful. 4.4 Research methodology in general SSM and rich pictures in particular are now standard action research methods having been used extensively in a range of settings since being developed by Checkland several decades ago. More recently, it has been used to unearth previously hidden cultural aspects of team interaction in investigating a change management project in the Middle East (Small, 2009) and change management in Australia (Sankaran et al., 2009), for studying innovation diffusion and application (Maqsood, 2006) in Australia, for developing competence profiles in human resource management (HRM) in New Zealand (Brocklesby, 1995), studying relationships between project managers and their sponsor in South Africa (Sewchurran and Barron, 2008) and of course widely being used in the UK for studying the application of policy and the hospital sector (Winter, 2009). This takes rich pictures out of the realm of being an exotic and poorly understood research approach to one that is accepted, where its limitations and strengths are now well understood. However, other than as documented in the above cited PhD theses, there is a paucity of literature on the detailed process of how to develop rich pictures and how to interpret results using a practical example. There are a growing number of papers about the use of rich pictures but we found few papers that explain in any depth how they may be constructed and developed. This “how to” knowledge is what we sought to be our contribution here so that readers who are interested in SSM and developing rich pictures more understandably and through a simpler process of sequence and layering

can use this paper as a guide. While rich pictures do vary in the way that they are developed and the sector in which they are applied, the following key aspects need to be considered as illustrated in this paper:

Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 00:01 22 May 2017 (PT)

(1)

SSM is applicable for undertaking research within a constructivist or pragmatic ontology and where the accurate and reliable lived experience of identified and selected interviewees are valued and anticipated to provide the most reliable source of data about the messy situation under study;

(2)

Appropriate interviewees need to be identified, and their understanding of the research objectives and expectations of their contribution needs to be explained;

(3)

The researcher needs to have an open mind and be rigorous in questioning and interacting with interviewees. This is necessary to develop a defendable, objective and reliable version of events through an iterative comprehensive process of knowledge co-generation in interpreting an accurate, holistic yet understandable portrayal of the messy situation under investigation;

(4)

The researcher needs to empathise and unearth emotions and feelings as well as data and facts about the situation. We have argued that use of the more use of artistic and cultural flow of colour, diagrams and symbols in the rich pictures presented a significantly improved resolution of such intangible aspects on a physical artefact such as a picture simply because colour, flow, models and symbols can act as suitable proxy to understanding and resolution; and

(5)

The exercise needs to lead to a resulting picture that can be used to integrate through a root definition that can then lead to viable and feasible plans to resolve the messy situation.

This approach provides a valuable tool for gaining insider insights about a situation under study. 4.4 The project outcome Rich pictures from those inside a project team provide a unique way to see a messy project problem situation or project requirement in a way that provides an inside-out view. Similarly if customers, clients and other relevant project-external stakeholders are interviewed to develop rich pictures then an outside-in project view can be obtained in a way that provides a holistic perspective of issues, situations, problems and requirements at the project initiation phase or at the project delivery phase. This can lead to a much better understanding of a situation context in simple summary format. Through the techniques discussed and demonstrated in this paper, and the example that was explored, one of the authors has taken this technique back into PM practice and effectively used it in subsequent disaster recovery projects and a range of programmes and projects. Root definitions were used to develop a project brief, to address a problem during project delivery and to address numerous issues and messy situations that often occur when undertaking project work. Thus rich pictures and root definitions can be more generally applied in PM to provide a powerful tool to positively impact a project delivery outcome. 5. Conclusions This aim of writing this paper was to illustrate, through an example taken from a recent research project, how rich pictures could be used to more effectively be

Stakeholder voices

357

IJMPB 7,3

Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 00:01 22 May 2017 (PT)

358

co-developed through a researcher-interviewee interaction in probing and exploring the delivery of disaster recovery projects. The example we provided, one of eight rich pictures developed as part of that action research study (Steinfort, 2010), illustrated the utility of this tool, especially when rigorously applied in high risk or minimum resources projects environments. The major new contribution presented in this paper is one of not only demonstrating that rich picture development is a powerful sensemaking tool but we illustrate how it can be implemented. We demonstrated how it allows stakeholders to have a strong and influential voice in the evolution of sustainable project delivery plans and methods that they can understand and use from conception to delivery. In reflecting on the use of this tool we suggest that it can be effectively applied or adapted for use in a range of disaster recovery situations and even wider in the resolution of purposeful programme development for a range of challenging projects. These tools led to a new way of understanding the lived experience of projects as a collaborative situational analysis tool. References Aaltonen, K. (2010), “Stakeholder management in international projects”, PhD, Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Helsinki University of Technology, Espoo. Aaltonen, K. (2011), “Project stakeholder analysis as an environmental interpretation process”, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 165-183. Account Ability (2005), AA1000 Stakeholder Engagement Standard Exposure Draft, Standard, Institute of Social and Ethical Accountability, London, 66. Alsop, R.J. (2004), “Corporate reputation: anything but superficial – the deep but fragile nature of corporate reputation”, Journal of Business Strategy, Vol. 25 No. 6, pp. 21-29. Amabile, T.M. and Kramer, S.J. (2007), “Inner work life”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 85 No. 5, pp. 72-83. Argyris, C. and Scho¨n, D. (1996), Organizational Learning II: Theory, Method, and Practice, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA. de Bakker, F.G.A. and den Hond, F. (2008), “Introducing the politics of stakeholder influence: a review essay. (Essay)”, Business and Society, Vol. 47 No. 1, pp. 8-20. Barrett, P. and Stanley, C. (1999), Better Construction Briefing, Blackwell Science Ltd., Oxford. Bell, S. and Morse, S. (2010), “Rich pictures: a means to explore the ‘sustainable mind’?”, Sustainable Development, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 30-47. Berman, S.L., Wicks, A.C., Kotha, S. and Jones, T.M. (1999), “Does stakeholder orientation matter? The relationship between stakeholder management models and firm financial performance”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 42 No. 5, pp. 488-506. Bourne, L. (2005), “Project relationship management and the stakeholder circle”, Doctor of Project Management, Graduate School of Business, RMIT University, Melbourne. Bourne, L. and Walker, D.H.T. (2006), “Visualising stakeholder influence – two Australian examples”, Journal of Project Management, Vol. 37 No. 1, pp. 5-21. Bourne, L.M. (2009), Stakeholder Relationship Management, Gower, Farnham, Surrey. Briner, W., Hastings, C. and Geddes, M. (1996), Project Leadership, Gower, Aldershot. Brocklesby, J. (1995), “Using soft systems methodology to identify competence requirements in HRM”, International Journal of Manpower, Vol. 16 Nos 5/6, pp. 70-84. Carroll, A.B. (1979), “A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 497-505.

Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 00:01 22 May 2017 (PT)

Chang, Y., Wilkinson, S., Potangaroa, R. and Seville, E. (2010), “Resourcing challenges for post-disaster housing reconstruction: a comparative analysis”, Building Research & Information, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 247-264. Checkland, P. (1999), Systems Thinking, Systems Practice, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Chichester. Checkland, P. (2000), “Soft systems methodology: a thirty year retrospective”, Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Vol. 17 No. S1, pp. S11-S58. Checkland, P. (2010), “Researching real-life: reflections on 30 years of action research”, Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 129-132. Checkland, P. and Winter, M. (2006), “Process and content: two ways of using SSM”, The Journal of the Operational Research Society, Vol. 57 No. 12, pp. 1435-1441. Chhokar, J.S., Brodbeck, F.C. and House, R.J. (2008), Culture and Leadership Across the World: The GLOBE Book of in-Depth Studies of 25 Societies, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ. Clarke, N. and Howell, R. (2009), Emotional Intelligence and Projects, Project Management Institute, Newtown Square, PA. Cleland, D.I. (1995), “Leadership and the project management body of knowledge”, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 82-88. Dick, B. (2009), “Action research literature 2006-2008: themes and trends”, Action Research, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 423-441. Dinsmore, P.C. (1999), Winning in Business with Enterprise Project Management, American Management Association, New York, NY. Donaldson, T. and Preston, L.E. (1995), “The stakeholder theory of the corporation: concepts, evidence, and implications”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 65-91. Dorfman, P.W., Hanges, P.J. and Brodbeck, F.C. (2004), “Leadership and cultural variation”, in House R.J., Hanges, P.J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P.W. and Gupta, V. (Eds), Culture, Leadership, and Organizations – The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies, Sage Publication Ltd, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 669-732. Emerson, C. (1983), “The outer word and inner speech: Bakhtin, Vygotsky, and the internalization of language”, Critical Inquiry, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 245-264. Finegan, A. (1994), “Soft systems methodology: an alternative approach to knowledge elicitation in complex and poorly defined systems”, Complexity International, 1: Paper ID: finega01. Folke, C. (2006), “Resilience: the emergence of a perspective for social-ecological systems analyses”, Global Environmental Change, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 253-267. Goleman, D. (2006), Social Intelligence: The New Science of Human Relationships, Bantam Books, New York, NY. Haigh, R. and Amaratunga, D. (2010), “An integrative review of the built environment discipline’s role in the development of society’s resilience to disasters”, International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 11-24. Hancock, D. (2010), Tame, Messy and Wicked Risk Leadership, Gower, Farnham. Leonard, D. and Sensiper, S. (1998), “The role of tacit knowledge in group innovation”, California Management Review, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 112-132. Leonard, D. and Straus, S. (1997), “Putting your company’s whole brain to work”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 75 No. 4, pp. 110-121. Luria, A.R. (1973), The Working Brain: An Introduction to Neuropsychology, Penguin, New York, NY. McKay, J. and Marshall, P. (1999), 2X6 ¼ 12, or Does It Equal Action Research, Australiasian Conference on Information Systems (ACIS), Wellington, NZ, available at: www.vuw.ac.nz/ acis99/j-m.html

Stakeholder voices

359

IJMPB 7,3

Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 00:01 22 May 2017 (PT)

360

McNiff, J. and Whitehead, J. (2000), Action Research in Organisations, Routledge, London. Manning, T.T. (2003), “Leadership across cultures: attachment style influences”, Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 20-31. Maqsood, T. (2006), The Role of Knowledge Management in Supporting Innovation and Learning in Construction, PhD, School of Business Information Technology, RMIT University, Melbourne. Maqsood, T., Walker, D.H.T. and Finegan, A.D. (2007), “Facilitating knowledge pull to deliver innovation through knowledge management: a case study”, Engineering Construction and Architectural Management, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 94-109. Miles, M.B. and Huberman, A.M. (1994), Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. OECD (2004), OECD Principles of Corporate Governance, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris. Olander, S. and Landin, A. (2005), “Evaluation of stakeholder influence in the implementation of construction projects”, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 321-328. Porter, M.E. and Kramer, M.R. (2011), “Creating shared value”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 89 Nos 1/2, pp. 62-77. Rittel, H.W.J. and Webber, M.M. (1973), “Dilemmas in a general theory of planning”, Policy Sciences, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 155-169. Rowley, J. (2006), “What do we need to know about wisdom?”, Management Decision, Vol. 44 No. 9, pp. 1246-1257. Sankaran, S., Tay, B.H. and Orr, M. (2009), “Managing organizational change by using soft systems thinking in action research projects”, International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 179-197. Sewchurran, K. and Barron, M. (2008), “An investigation into successfully managing and sustaining the project sponsor-project manager relationship using soft systems methodology”, Project Management Journal, Vol. 39 No. S1, pp. S56-S68. Small, J.M. (2009), “The emergent realities of project praxis in socially complex project environments”, Doctor of Project Management, DPM, School of Property, Construction and Project Management, RMIT, Melbourne. Smulders, F., Lousberg, L. and Dorst, K. (2008), “Towards different communication in collaborative design”, International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 352-367. Solso, R.L. (1994), Cognition and the Visual Arts, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Standards Australia (1997), Planning for emergencies – Health Care Facilities, Standards Australia, 27pp. Steinfort, P. (2010), “Understanding the antecedents of project management best practice-lessons to be learned from aid relief projects”, PhD, School of Property, Construction and Project Management, RMIT University, Melbourne. Steinfort, P. and Walker, D.H.T. (2011), What Enables Project Success: Lessons from Aid Relief Projects, Project Management Institute, Newtown Square, PA. Sutterfield, J.S., Friday-Stroud, S.S. and Shivers-Blackwell, S.L. (2006), “A case study of project and stakeholder management failures: lessons learned”, Project Management Journal, Vol. 37 No. 5, pp. 26-35. Teo, M.M.M. and Loosemore, M. (2010), “Community-based protest against construction projects the social determinants of protest movement continuity”, International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 216-235.

Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 00:01 22 May 2017 (PT)

Toor, S.-u.-R. and Ofori, G. (2008), “Leadership for future construction industry: agenda for authentic leadership”, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 26 No. 6, pp. 620-630. Trompenaars, F. (1993), Riding the Waves of Culture: Understanding Cultural Diversity in Business, Economics Books, London. Turner, J.R., Mu¨ller, R. and Dulewicz, V. (2009), “Comparing the leadership styles of functional and project managers”, International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 198-216. Turner, R. and Lloyd-Walker, B. (2008), “Emotional intelligence (EI) capabilities training: can it develop EI in project teams?”, International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, Vol. 1 No. 4, pp. 512-534. Vaagaasar, A.L. (2011), “Development of relationships and relationship competencies in complex projects”, International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 294-307. Vygotskii, A.L. (1986), Thought and Language, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Walker, D.H.T. and Steinfort, P. (2011), “Using rich pictures for assessing wicked problems in projects”, in Martinsuo, M., Gemu¨nden, H.G. and Huemann, M. (Eds), EURAM 2011, Management Culture in the 21st Century, June 1-4, European Academy of Management, Tallinn, pp. 1-25. Walker, D.H.T. and Steinfort, P. (2013), “Using an improved rich pictures approach to improve project situational analysis in complex aid reconstruction development projects”, International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 182-198. Winch, G.M. (2004), “Managing project stakeholders”, in Morris P.W.G. and Pinto, J.K. (Eds), The Wiley Guide to Managing Projects, Wiley, New York, NY, pp. 321-339. Winter, M. (2009), “Using soft systems methodology to structure project definition”, in Williams T.M., Samset, K. and Sunnev˚ag, K.J. (Eds), Making Essential Choices with Scant Information: Front-End Decision Making in Major Projects, Palgave Macmillan, Basingstoke, pp. 125-144. Winter, M. and Checkland, P. (2003), “Soft systems – a fresh perspective for project management”, Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers: Civil Engineering, Vol. 156 No. 4, pp. 187-192. Winter, M. and Szczepanek, T. (2009), Images of Projects, Farnham, Gower. Yin, R. (2009), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Corresponding author Professor Derek Walker can be contacted at: [email protected]

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

Stakeholder voices

361

Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 00:01 22 May 2017 (PT)

This article has been cited by: 1. Kirsi Aaltonen, Jaakko Kujala. 2016. Towards an improved understanding of project stakeholder landscapes. International Journal of Project Management 34:8, 1537-1552. [CrossRef] 2. Pernille Eskerod, Martina Huemann, Grant Savage. 2015. Project Stakeholder Management-Past and Present. Project Management Journal 46:6, 6-14. [CrossRef] 3. David Taylor RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia Derek H.T. Walker School of Property, Construction and Project Management, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia Tayyab Maqsood School of Property, Construction and Project Management, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia . 2015. Integration of contractors skills and expertise as part of the people capability of complex project based organisations. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business 8:2, 379-392. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 4. Patrick Lückmann. 2015. Towards Identifying Success Factors for Cross-cultural Project Customer Engagement: A Literature Review. Procedia Computer Science 64, 324-333. [CrossRef]